Industrial Relations Conciliators Revise Petition against PPHI Law
Image

The Principal Petitioners and legal counsels attending the petition revision hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2004 on Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement,Wednesday (3/8/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.


JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of Law No. 2 of 2004 on Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement (PPHI) on Wednesday, March 8, 2023. The case No. 19/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by Nandang Rakhmat Gumilar, Bayu Alhafizh Nurhuda, Achmad Rizki Zulfikar, Muhammad Alfian, and Sofyan Hadimawan (Petitioners I-V), industrial relations conciliators. They challenge Article 19 paragraph (1) letter c of the PPHI Law, which reads, “is at least 45 years of age.”

At the petition revision hearing, the Petitioners, represented by Muhammad Iqbal Sumarlan Putra, conveyed that they had elaborated on the content of the letter from the acting Director for Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement of the Directorate-General for Industrial Relations Development and Social Security of the Ministry of Manpower to invite regional officers to discuss the pre-recruitment process of prospective industrial relations conciliators, which the Petitioners attended.

“The meeting was followed up by a proposal letter by conciliators from each institution to the PPHI director to nominate the Petitioners for training,” Iqbal said before the panel chaired by Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo.

He explained that after following the process and meeting the requirements, the Petitioners applied for the conciliator positions by sending a written request to the Ministry of Manpower through the regent or head of the local institution on manpower. After that, the Petitioners’ documents were assessed and declared complete, as proven by a checklist of completeness.

“At the moment, the Petitioners are only awaiting stipulation of legitimacy by the ministry, but the ministry did not respond. Then, on January 17, 2023, a confirmation letter was sent by the Manpower Office of Bekasi Regency for a meeting. At the meeting, it was discovered why the Petitioners had not been given legitimacy, which concerns the minimum age limit, for one,” he said.

Also read: Minimum Age for Industrial Relation Conciliators Questioned

At the preliminary hearing on Thursday, February 23, the Petitioners revealed that on December 6, 2021, the acting Director for Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement of the Directorate-General for Industrial Relations Development and Social Security of the Ministry of Manpower sent an invitation letter No. Und.103/HI.04.02/XII/21 to discuss the pre-recruitment process of prospective industrial relations conciliators to identify interest in the vocation among non-civil servants (PNS) or contract staff in industry areas as well as its budget.

The Petitioners are eligible to be prospective conciliators, but their appointment has not been approved by the Minister of Manpower. Only after the Bekasi Regency Manpower Office sent a letter on the technical assistance program of prospective conciliators of Bekasi did they found out why: the minimum age required by the PPHI Law was 45 years.

The minimum age requirement for conciliators is higher than that for ad hoc judges in the Industrial Relations Court and the Supreme Court, which is ‘at least 30 (thirty) years of age’ based on Article 64 letter d of Law No. 2 of 2004. The determination of this age requirement clearly harms the right of prospective conciliators under 45 who have met all [other] requirements in the a quo Law. In addition, there is an urgency to appoint conciliators because since 2021, there are only 17 conciliators in Indonesia. This clearly hinders the achievement of the goal of a conciliatory institution, which is to resolve industrial relations disputes swiftly, effectively, fairly, and economically.

In the petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare Article 19 paragraph (1) letter c of the PPHI Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted to include “prospective conciliators who have met all requirements set in Article 19 paragraph (1) letters a, b, d, e, f, g, h, and i of the Law on Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement.”

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 3/8/2023 15:53 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.


Wednesday, March 08, 2023 | 14:37 WIB 69